@#1

That's the best you can do here?

The lame content of your comment only serves to confirm what is in the OP's post.

Wanna play again?

@#13 ... Free speech -- especially speech free from corporate media power. ...

Your comments seem to equate free speech with those whose purpose seems to be the accumulations of "likes."

While I am not against free speech, I do have an issue when your comments equate online popularity with, well anything resembling reality.

Have you looked at the more popular youtube stars? Really, you are basing your entire argument upon popularity on youtube.

Please, you really need to spend more time on youtube.

@#15 ... I did answer that. Kids say things. I grew up with kids always saying, "I'm going to kill you". I hear adults saying it too, ...

That's tactical.

I asked about strategic.

And you got nuthin'.

Based upon your comment, I doubt if you even understood my question.

Remember the movie War Games?

The tag line, "want to play again?" :)

I'm moving on, it's not worth staying up late for this level of discourse.

@#13 ...

... I think in a court of law a question like that would be called "leading". >>>

Possibly. But another answer might be "no one."

... "A person saying that she would kill her classmates."

When asked whom she would kill. ...

She could have said "no one."

... Hell, I grew up with kids always saying, "I'm going to kill you" to each other, ...

And look at the mass shootings we have. That approach has obviously not worked out well.

I asked two types of questions, a tactical one, which you answered, and a strategic one, which you dodged.

So let me circle back to the more strategic question...

Why does is seem to be OK with you that students are comfortable with talking about killing their classmates?

If Pres Trump's administration were truly as transparent as he alleges, he would have no problems with journalists asking him, and those in his administration, questions.

So the question lingers, why is Pres Trump so afraid of journalists?

Is it that they ask questions, and he does not allow that in his administration?

Because journalists like Ms Amons ask the tough questions, the answers we need to hear.

@#9 ... Sorry, sticks and fingers are not threatening ...

No need to apologize, I mostly (but not completely) agree with you.

My concern resides in the fact that a 12-year-old thinks it is appropriate to point a gun (OK, a virtual gun) at someone with no reason.

From the cited article...

...The person said that during a class discussion, another student asked the girl, if she could kill five people in the class, who would they be?...

Aside from this being wrong on so many levels, there is a problem here.

A person saying that she would kill her classmates.

Would you want that person in school with your kids?

Over-reaction? Maybe. But what are school officials to do in this type of circumstance?

It is not an easy question. The best answer is to over-react on the side of safety.

But if we can move from the tactical answer to the strategic answer...

I have questions...

Why does the person being asked about killing classmates respond by making a gun gesture, and not question why classmates should be killed?

So, how should we handle this threatening behavior?

And, yes, it is a threatening behavior.

But it was a 12-year-old.

So what do we do when a 12 year old exhibits threatening behavior?

@#7 ... The traffic that podcasts like Joe Rogan or Jimmy Dore pull is undeniable ...

But you do not comment upon whether that is the problem or the solution.

@#6 ... Jimmy Dore ...

Because of the repetition here, I viewed some of the videos in question.

They were, ummmm, interesting.

Like most youtube personalities, the videos seemed to me to be more the product of an attention whore than a thinking analyst.

I view the time I spent watching those videos as time invested, with little return.

Others may have a differing opinion and are free, imo, to waste their time watching them.

I'm thinking that Sec of State Pompeo thought, quite erroneously, that talking with a reporter in Tennessee would be fine because there would be no questions about international aspects of what is occurring in Washington, DC.

Wow, if that was what he thought, was he ever wrong.

Reporter Nancy Amons asked the tough questions that I wanted answers to. Thank-you Ms Amons.

Thank-you for holding our government employees accountable.

@#4 ... deep state ...

Usually when "deep state" is mentioned, I post this obligtory cartoon...

@#6 ... The use of America's military should never be viewed solely in a "left/right" dynamic. ...

Our soldiers and military deserve far better than a CIC as compromised as this one where no one can be certain of his exact motivations for doing anything when his own business intersects in opposition to this nation's expressed and longstanding policy which he abruptly negated.

Agreement.

... no one can be certain of his exact motivations for doing anything when his own business intersects in opposition to this nation's expressed and longstanding policy ...

I would make one slight change, though. If I may...

...no one can be certain of his exact motivations for doing anything when his own business and/or personal political interests intersect in opposition to sworn oaths and this nation's expressed and longstanding policy...

That works better for me, and seems to be more appropriate in light of the current expanding pool of evidence.

@#45

Here's the White Shade of Pale in an unreleased stereo version:

@#3 ... It's funny how the proggies used to condemn American soldiers being sent to their deaths for someone or something (usually oil) else. Now they gladly want to send Americans to die over there. ...

I'm not seeing what you seem to be seeing.

From what I've been seeing, the left side seems to be quite concerned about longer-term effects and ramifications of the US abandoning an ally.

As much as Pres Trump seems to be trying to frame his decision differently, that longer-term aspect seems to stay important to those on the left.

In this area, I cannot say I am in disagreement with the left.

From way back on Oct 11...

Could this be the reason why Pres Trump tried to prevent Amb Sondland's testimony before Congress?

@#12 ... How is getting the troops out putting them in harm's way?...

War hawks and anti-war activists both have one major common goal --- both groups want our Troops to comes home safely.

... its glaring failure to effectively represent the institutional interests of the presidency. ...

Yet another example of Pres Trump requiring those who work in the White House to be loyal to him and not to the sworn duties their positions require.

Pres Erdogan apparently knew if he got Pres Trump on a phone call without Pres Trump's advisors in the Oval Office, that he would be able to bully Pres Trump into backing down and withdrawing American troops, as Pres Erdogan wanted.

If Pres Trump truly wanted to stop the endless wars in the Middle East, he should have consulted his military advisors on how to end the US involvement in the wars and bring our troops home.

Instead, Pres Trump was bullied by Pres Erdogan into throwing our Kurd allies into the Cuisinart.

Showing that the US is an unreliable ally in war.

I remain to be convinced that this is the way to Make America Great Again.

... 2017 PIC (L-R): VP Pence, Fruman, Parnas, Trump, and Giuliani ...

That's quite the collection of Trump admin folk.

It's interesting how Mr Giuliani has such a seemingly critical senior role in the Trump administration, yet he is not even a government employee.

Is Mr Giuliani working for Pres Trump's personal interests, or for the interest of the American people and the Constitution?

Thanks for this scorecard. It is now easier to understand the players.

@#3 ... He needs "wins" right now... ...

That aspect has been troubling me about this.

What compromises is he making or going to make in order to get some manner of a deal he can point to?

So far, I've heard or read little about the enforcement provisions of the partial deal he negotiated. For me, the enforcement is the critical part, e.g., what happens if China is caught continuing to steal our intellectual property?

So far, it is looking as if Pres Trump has received fewer concessions from China in this round than were agreed to back in May when he walked away from the table. So all the angst and pain suffered by farmers and others since last May were for naught?

This is looking a lot like last year's government shutdown where he shut down the government and wound up with less than what was offered before he shut the government down.

I'm starting to wonder just how good of a deal maker Pres Trump really is.